101
posted ago by sleepydude ago by sleepydude +101 / -0

https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/DoD%20Law%20of%20War%20Manual%20-%20June%202015%20Updated%20Dec%202016.pdf?ver=2016-12-13-172036-190

11.1.3.3 Occupation and Non-International Armed Conflict. The law of belligerent occupation does not address non-international armed conflict as such because a belligerent occupation presupposes that the Occupying Power is hostile in relation to the State whose territory is being occupied.35 A State’s military forces controlling its own territory would not be regarded as conducting an occupation; similarly, foreign forces conducting operations with the consent of the territorial State would also not be regarded as conducting an occupation.36

"However, the law of belligerent occupation may be applicable to a non-international armed conflict when a non-State party to the conflict has been recognized as a belligerent.37 In addition, a non-international armed conflict could be regarded as taking place in the context of, or alongside, an occupation.38**


Basically, I think Trump used Patriots on Jan 6th in order to fulfill this ^ specific prerequisite to assume a Belligerent Occupation.

So, let me make sure you're getting this straight, because this can get confusing if you're going by other peoples' take on the Law of War Manual.

I'm not saying I'm right, but this is a theory.

The DeepState is not the current occupying force. The Jan 6th Patriots are the current occupying (belligerent) force.

Yeah, you got that right. Trump DID host an insurrection.

But what "country, nation, or territory" did he occupy?

Washington D.C.

Yup!

We all know by know Washington D.C. isn't actually a "part" of the United States. It's neither a city nor a country, by typical terms anyway.

It's not even really a territory, because the United States Of America hasn't ever disputed its occupation, so it's not "really" an "occupied territory" in the traditional sense.

Oh wait, WE HAVEN'T DISPUTED IT?!

Hell, yeah, we have!

It's being disputed as we speak. Let's read it again:

However, the law of belligerent occupation may be applicable to a non-international armed conflict when a non-State party to the conflict has been recognized as a belligerent.37 In addition, a non-international armed conflict could be regarded as taking place in the context of, or alongside, an occupation.38

Who is this non-State party of a non-international armed conflict that has been recognized as belligerent?

Jan 6th Patriots, that's who.

But it also makes the DeepState an occupying force as well!


In case you didn't see the trap card Trump just played while blowing Seto Kaiba's blue-eyes white dragon into the shadow realm, let me spell it out for you a little more.

Trump piggy-backed on the Jan 6th Insurrection in order to activate 11.1.3.3 to "justify" the Belligerent Occupation of Washington D.C.

He gave them exactly what they wanted; an Insurrection.

Why? To wage war on the United States' greatest threat: The Swamp.

Oh yeah, you got me right, he actually invaded another sovereign body! It WAS a real insurrection, and they can't actually parse what that means, hence the Jan 6th Commission to try and figure out what the hell he's actually activated in terms of LoW protocols. They have NO CLUE what is going on under the table because they actually DID succeed in their plan.

Trump and Patriots gave them absolutely everything they wanted, and they had nothing else planned because they didn't really think they would pull it off.

In fact, he gave them MORE than they wanted.

Then, all he had to make sure of is that the chucklefucks in Congress declared it an insurrection, and continue to do so.

Because it IS an insurrection. Gasp, plot twist!

Trump did invade Washington D.C. with his supporters.

And as a result, the U.S. Military had to step in and take control.

Not the Capitol Police.

Yeah, keep that in mind. The Capitol Police are a separate military sworn only to Washington D.C. -- Kinda like the Swiss Guard are for the Vatican.

So the only way around them is to call them out on their "jurisdiction."

To stop the Military from coming in to investigate the Jan 6th Insurrection, they would have to declare the Capitol Police what they really are, a separate Military for a separate sovereign body.

Read it again:

"A State’s military forces controlling its own territory would not be regarded as conducting an occupation; similarly, **foreign forces conducting operations with the consent of the territorial State would also not be regarded as conducting an occupation.**36"

Yeah, the only way Trump could invade Washington D.C. (another "state/sovereign") and play by the Law of War Manual to prevent U.N. intervention was to get us to act as his "armed, non-international, non-State party" and then officially recognized as a belligerent occupying force.

There really can't be two Occupying Powers at once, because of the U.N. having to recognize that Occupying Power, especially if one is the State's own military forces.

But the Military ISN'T the State's (Washington D.C.) own military force, the Capitol Police are.

KEK!

They wanted to impeach Trump so bad they were completely blind-sided when Trump played the impossible card -- Operation: Come at me, bro; I fucking dare you!

And they did! They fell for it hook-line-and-sinker!


But where are we now?!

Well, here's what might be going on.

11.1.3.4 Occupation and Post-War Situations.

The GC, however, continues to apply in occupied territory until one year after the general close of military operations, and the Occupying Power is bound, for the duration of the occupation, to the extent that such State exercises the functions of government in such territory, by the provisions of certain articles of the GC.42

So, the "war" doth did occur. The Military kicked out the Patriots.

Military operations have ceased (or have they?)

And the Occupying Power (Patriots?!) is allowed to be active for a whole year in order to "maintain order" and "exercise the functions of government in such territory" among the population.

But the "invaders" (Patriots) have already left, you say!

So, who is the Occupying Power now?

Would it be the Military?

Well, yes and no...

Is it crazy to think that it's the ones who were there the whole time? Our beloved Congress Men and Women?!

The DeepState?

Uh oh, what happens the Legitimate Government(Military) discovers it's not the Legitimate Government and it's actually an Occupying Power that shut down another Occupying Power because the real "Legitimate" Government(DeepState) failed to disclose that the Not-So Legitimate Government(Military) isn't actually legitimate and is factually another Occupying Power.

Shrug?

Yeah, there's the loophole we were waiting for! Uncharted territory means you can do whatever you want!

If there isn't a rule against it, it isn't cheating!


So, the Occupying Force(Patriots) is kicked out and Patriots are Detained (Jan Six Political Prisoners), but simultaneously revealing a Cabal "Occupying Force" which is actually the real "Legitimate" Government.

What a mess...

But so long as the Cabal continues to declare it an Insurrection, they create a legal feed-back loop where they permit the Military to continually investigate all "Occupying Forces" that exist in the territory. So while the Military can't act, it can investigate any and all "Occupations" going on.

Which means, unless Washington D.C. declares it isn't a part of the United States, the DeepState as well can be investigated.

Oopsie.

If you want a visual, the Military is acting like that boss that accidentally spawns twice because the game got glitched real good..

Except one boss is "controlled" by the Cabal and the other boss is "controlled" by the White Hats.

We the People are Player 1. The Cabal are Player 2.

Player 2 is a griefer and wants to ruin Player 1's game by sic'ing the world boss on them (in World of Warcraft Terms).

Player 1 gets unwittingly coached by Trump to activate a glitch that spawns two of the World Bosses and traps Player 2 in the arena with them. Once the first World Boss goes down to the second, and agro switches, Player 2 is fucked!


Right now we are/have been in 11.2 since Trump told us to go home on Jan 6th.

11.2 WHEN MILITARY OCCUPATION LAW APPLIES

Similarly, as long as the occupation is effective, there is no precise number of forces that are considered necessary to constitute an effective occupation.

In order to stay in power and prevent the Legitimate Government/Military from stepping in officially, they have to continue to claim the Jan 6th Insurrection has led to an Occupation of Washington D.C.

Obviously they can't just come out and say that, right, because it's not true factually, but that doesn't matter for the rules though, so they are working on borrowed time that Trump gave them to hang themselves.

Effectively, they were chased into a corner and the walls are closing in.

They have control so long as the farce of an Occupying Power (Patriots) is in place, but as soon as that is up the Military is permitted to view the DeepState as the Occupying Power since, due to the investigations behind the scenes, they have been exposed.

Keep in mind, this is all predicated under their lie that Washington D.C. isn't owned by foreign actors. If they admit the truth about what D.C. is, the game they've played for decades is up and the whole house of cards comes down instantaneously.

The only reason we have to go through all this is because of all the "cheats" they have put in place over the years to give them the upper hand. They could have stopped their own fall if they would have just played fair this go around.

Game Theory.

Once Jan 6th comes by, it triggers 11.3, as the End of Occupation (Patriots) and we are off to the races with another Belligerent Occupation(Military) and REAL Military action to expel them as the make-pretend government they actually are.


Here are some receipts:

"Election Day" is code for "11.3", literally, of the Law of War Manual. Post 4079 is about 11.2, which means we must already have passed 11.2 since 11.1 had to have been triggered since Jan 6th and Trump's speech, and 11.2 simply clarifies 11.1.

11.3 will be clear when 4587comes true:

C19 narrative kill date: Election Day +1

And an immediate trip of 11.4 as soon as 11.3 goes down:

Prepare for zero-day [massive cyber-power] attacks [attempts] on 11.4.

So I know we aren't at 11.3 yet.


That's my theory anyway.

Thoughts?

Comments (65)
sorted by:
41
dty6 41 points ago +41 / -0

This is very interesting, and I actually followed it. You could be onto something here. To add to your sauce, I did realize, some time ago, that the J6 prisoners aren't being given their American rights bc DC is a foreign occupied land. Very very interesting.

19
dty6 19 points ago +19 / -0

actually, you're brilliant

13
Darwyn 13 points ago +13 / -0

The fact that they are holding political prisoners is pretty much proof the battle isn't over. By almost every interpretation that one year time frame either ends on Jan 5th or Jan 20th. So we should be ready for SHTF soon.

10
dty6 10 points ago +10 / -0

I'm ready! Happy New Year, fren!

-1
Greekish -1 points ago +1 / -2

I followed as far as

We all know by know

4
dty6 4 points ago +4 / -0

Take the day off, Greeky

24
Narg 24 points ago +24 / -0

Well, that was interesting. I've thought for some time that this coming Jan 20 (one year after the "transfer of power") would be an important date, based on that section (11.1.3.4 Occupation and Post-War Situations) of LoW.

But you've put together an entire head-spinning theory that for the first time (that I've seen) makes sense of the bizarre insistence by the Deep State that Jan 6 was an "insurrection" AND might also be the reason Trump has seemed almost indifferent to the plight of the Jan 6 prisoners (POWs); gotta keep the fiction going until the end of the one-year rule. Getting them released would put a kink in that. -- if I'm even understanding your definitions correctly (uh, who is the Occupying Power again?).

I've no idea if your theory is correct, but it's a worthy effort and provides an intriguing framework for a strange and unprecedented situation.

14
SemperSupra 14 points ago +14 / -0

I've been wondering about the dog comms with Biden and this would kind of fit with foreign occupation.

Biden's dog Major died. Major is considered a UK military rank. He gets a new dog (owner) named Commander which is a US military rank. It almost reads like a comm that Biden's ownership transferred from the UK military to the US military.

However, that's only a theory on the comms. If the UK Mil had been the one controlling Biden this whole time then that would be a foreign power.

6
Fjolsvith 6 points ago +6 / -0

In certain jurisdiction, the Federal government corporation was owned by Her Majesty.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/PsMcXUEXKfA0/

6
VetforTrump 6 points ago +6 / -0

Major is also a U..s military rank.

4
SemperSupra 4 points ago +4 / -0

I just realized it was Champ who died after 13 years. The Biden's gave Major a new home after 3 years. I had them mixed up.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/19/politics/champ-biden-german-shepherd-dog-dies/index.html

Still I do think they are comms that suggest a change of management.

https://www.npr.org/2021/12/21/1066220864/commander-biden-puppy-major

"Welcome home, Commander" suggests someone returning home rather than a newly arrived pet. Shouldn't it be "Welcome to your new home, Commander".

The German Shepherd was bred to herd sheep and was used as a war dog:

As the name suggests, the German Shepherd originated in Germany in the late 1800s. The most intelligent, responsive and obedient local shepherd dogs in Germany were bred to create what is now known as the German Shepherd. This breed was responsible for herding sheep and protecting flocks from predators. They were not considered pets or companions, but rather servants

Shepherd = sheep handler.

4
NeuroticFisherman 4 points ago +4 / -0

Isn't major also a US military rank though? I know at least in the Army it is.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
11
Fjolsvith 11 points ago +11 / -0

Okay, I absolutely am on board with this. I've seen four date-fagging things to indicate to me that January 7th is the day the military acts.

  1. Q post on Dec 8th: Done in 30.

  2. Talk back in late Nov that everything would be done by Christmas.

  3. Julian vs Gregorian Calendar. Christmas on the Julian calendar falls on January 7th on the Gregorian calendar.

  4. A post by Whiplash347:

[Forwarded from ConservativeJblQck1776 (Jblock0929)] [ Photo ] So I just realized from Jan 6 when Trump is supposed to speak to January 19th is 13 days. Coincidence??? 3day event 10 days of darkness🤔🤔🤔 January 19th??🤔🤔💥🍿🍿

And January 7th is the 1 year requirement for the Military to wait before they act.

7
kula 7 points ago +7 / -0

So we still get the Christmas gift Trump promised us?

10
GoingCamaro 10 points ago +10 / -0

Jan 6th is the last day of Christmas. Member that 12 days of Christmas song? The 12 days start on the 25th.

EDIT: Trump also has a press conference at Mar a Lago (the Winter White House) on the 6th. While I normally would discourage datefagging... a lot of date fags from different origins are starting to converge. If I was a betting man, I'd be looking at my budget for some betting money...

6
Fjolsvith 6 points ago +6 / -0

Ah, now I understand. I thought everyone had all their Christmas lights up early for next year, but it is really just because Christmas isn't over until the 6th.

"362 days until Christmas and people got their lights up already!"

5
MAGA_mandalorian 5 points ago +5 / -0

I came here to mention just that. Trump holding a press conference on the one year anniversary of Jan 6th, which would trigger that one year occupation in LOW come true

2
MAGA_mandalorian 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sure looks like that!

4
lsvogel 4 points ago +4 / -0

Watch Dan Scavino tweets and messages on social platforms. Use the length of his video clips and time stamps that may coordinate with the Q posts. He's been sending comms as if saying; 'We're almost there...'

2
GoingCamaro 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump also has a press conference scheduled for Jan 6th at Mar a Lago...

2
VetforTrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pray it's so

11
SemperSupra 11 points ago +11 / -0

The DeepState is not the current occupying force. The Jan 6th Patriots are the current occupying (belligerent) force.

Yeah, you got that right. Trump DID host an insurrection.

This is just a thought.

Comms suggest to me that Biden's ownership shifted from UK military to US military. His dog "Major" died and he now has a dog named "Commander". UK to US.

Look at Q post 3682. It talks about the UK's snap election of 2019 and says:

National pride. Independence. We, the People. Welcome to the Party. WWG1WGA!!!

This was a victory for the conservatives and Boris Johnson. Q touts it as great news.

IF Boris Johnson is a White Hat and the UK military (not the organizations like the Rothschilds and Royals within the UK) had been working with the White Hats, but pretending to go along with the DS then this would make sense.

IF the military is the only way, but the DS will cause a meltdown if Martial Law is declared then what do you? The DS actually pushed for Trump to declare martial law and send tanks into the streets of Portland like what Bush Sr. did during the LA riots after Rodney King (same playbook as George Floyd).

They had BLM rioting. One one hand he was labeled by their conservatives plans as a "wimp". On the other hand the MSM wrote article after article about "What If Trump Declares Martial Law?" They wanted him too.

They had insurrectionists (people larping as patriots) ready to go and create a blood bath to get regular people to rise up. It was pushed hard on The Donald in the run up to J6.

I remember being shocked to see Trump speak behind bullet proof glass on January 6th. I had never seen a president do that before in the US capital. It suggested a serious threat to him.

If foreign occupation triggers the Law of War, then is there a way to have martial law without it being shown. All you need is a foreign power to help. If the UK military steps up under the guise of going along with the DS plans and they pull Biden's strings, then the DS has to back down because they think they're in charge.

Trump steps to the side. The next phase is talking the sheep out of the Mass Hysteria that the DS had them whipped into with the pandemic. They need to cool down. Sheep in a mass hysteria are extremely dangerous.

Do you know during the witch trials that stretched across Europe for centuries there were Mass Hysterias so bad that villages murdered all their young women as "witches". They literally destroyed themselves. How is that sane? People lose their minds when they're in the grip of mass hysteria.

Law of War kicks in because a "foreign power" is in charge, but they're not actual working for the enemy. The enemy just thinks they are. They've been tricked. Remember all those military leaders who kept vocally saying they'd never support marital law. They kept reassuring the DS "We're totally with you. Trust us."

It's like a dance. UK military now puppets the Biden Administration while continuing to dismantle the DS infrastructure on their side. DS is at a loss how things went awry. What happened?

Law of War kicks in because a "foreign power" owns the White House. US military can now quietly continue to dismantle the DS infrastructure on their side.

Just a theory.

3
POCOTHUNDER 3 points ago +3 / -0

people fear what they dont understand

2
Greekish 2 points ago +2 / -0

Remember all those military leaders who kept vocally saying they'd never support marital law.

You mean they don't believe in marriage? Is that even relevant?

9
VoxDawg 9 points ago +9 / -0

Nicely done, Anon.

It definitely seems like we get some plot-advancing events at J6+ 1Y and Fauxnauguration Day +1Y.

Besides, we all know the Jan 6 Unselect Committee couldn't care less about #MuhInsurrection. They're trying to get to DJT's PEADs.

9
NanaQ45 9 points ago +9 / -0

Sleep-deprived, ya mist have had some caffeine. This is excellent! Twists and turns and brilliant actually. Thsnks!

8
Mr_A 8 points ago +8 / -0

So the presence of Jan 6th Patriots determines that the Law of War of belligerent occupation can be applied? And without their presence, patriots couldn't declare DC to be occupied territory? But with their presence, even imprisoned and with no shooting going on, patriots can declare it an armed conflict? But only if congress, and an illegitimate congress at that, declares it an insurrection?

It seems convoluted, and dependent on technicalities, which seems like an unnecessary gamble. The technicalities are 1) no armed conflict in reality, 2) if the DS simply called it a crime instead of an insurrection it would invalidate the cassus belli, paralyzing the patriots.

OTOH, before 1/6, President Trump did clearly say that he needed us there for him, so that's a big clue. Also, it seems that our military is faithfully observing the one year from occupation mentioned in the LoW manual. Then again, nothing in DC today resembles armed conflict.

I think there's something in here, but it requires some distilling. And while it seems important in itself, this seems limited to DC only, and ancillary to devolution.

6
Passthatwrench 6 points ago +6 / -0

The technicalities are 1) no armed conflict in reality. >

Covid is a bio weapon, it may be considered the armed conflict. We, including DC are under attack.

I do respect your skepticism as there is a lot to unpack but the oddly satisfying point of the OP is that he answered each of my objections in real-time as I read through the lengthy description. I am not ready to go all-in on this yet but it does ring somewhat cozy and makes as much sense as any leading theories.

4
Mr_A 4 points ago +4 / -0

I'm not skeptical so much as confused. I think this is one part of the puzzle, and expressed confusingly. I'll read some other comments, and perhaps it'll be boiled down to something easier to digest. You are right, in that there are a couple things it explains that nothing else does, especially why Trump said he needed us to be there for him on that day, and possibly why it's been a calendar year before DC is openly retaken. I think devolution is a different piece of the puzzle, explaining the executive chain of command and the continuation of government. But if anything depends absolutely on congress categorizing the 1/6 events as insurrection, then Pelosi has to be in on it, which is somewhat disturbing. So I think it's worth poking holes in the idea to see what survives.

5
Passthatwrench 5 points ago +5 / -0

Agreed and the only thing I would suggest is that Pelosi may not be in on it. The way OP described, it’s a boomerang. In Pelosi’s lust for power and hatred for DJT, he beat them with their own stick

3
NeuroticFisherman 3 points ago +3 / -0

None of the J6 individuals were actually charged with insurrection though, it was all things like breaking and entering or something to that effect, and disrupting an official preceding. Despite what Congress or the MSM may call it, if these protesters weren't actually charged with insurrection, is it really an "official" insurrection? Like you mentioned, this proposed theory relies on technicalities, and this is one I could see getting in the way.

3
sleepydude [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

this seems limited to DC only, and ancillary to devolution.

I've considered that the shipping of illegals could be enough to declare an Occupation Power in each State individually.

They would have to "take over" though, so that's where that train of thought blows up...

3
Mr_A 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think devolution stands on its own, as far as who is running the federal government, why and how. You might also have seen the slag threads about a possible convention of states prior to January 6th, which makes sense as an additional legal authorization. This is just the answer to "why didn't they just arrest them all already?" And "how do we handle the whole DC thing without inviting the blue helmets in, since DC technically isn't ours?"

8
Pollycracker 8 points ago +8 / -0

I think it is brilliant, and so Trumpsonian.

7
Fjolsvith 7 points ago +7 / -0

Mods, this should be stickied.

6
Michonne21 6 points ago +6 / -0

I like the idea of your premise. Jan 6 was cover for some operation(s). I wish I knew exactly everything. There were so many military active duty there that day it was odd. I think there is merit to your theory but the many smart minds on this site will provide the best insight.

5
McTwizle 5 points ago +5 / -0

These are the posts that I miss around here. The vaxx ones are helpful but way outnumber ones like this. Very interesting times ahead frens.

4
Dragonwarlord 4 points ago +4 / -0

Fascinating theory! Nice job!!

4
bobbyjoelinneman2 4 points ago +4 / -0

since when have laws mattered? and "REAL Military action" is what the trump/q faction is trying to avoid

4
sleepydude [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

Laws matter because the bad guys aren't homogenous.

There are factions, and THEY make the loose rules to make sure the sheep (us) can never break free and turn on the slave masters.

They fancy themselves rulers, but there's always someone who wants to be top of the pyramid. To stop in-fighting, they had to come to arrangements, which means rules.


Trump/WhiteHats entered us into a race we didn't even know was going on, let alone one that we could ever dream of winning.

They never in their wildest dreams would have thought the horse could get the better of the jockey if given the chance.

Ultimately, however, it only makes sense that a horse without the burden of a jockey would run the fastest. They don't want to admit that their "leadership" has only ever held back humanity, not tamed it.

2
bobbyjoelinneman2 2 points ago +2 / -0

but most of the internecine intra-illuminati struggle is treachery, ignoring laws. I just don't see how the Roths etc would hold themselves to following any laws. for example, none of the Strozk/Page/Comey level respected their oaths or security clearance obligations? and that's true all the way up.

6
sleepydude [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

Laws apply retroactively, and if you think about it that's pretty much the only way Laws work to begin with.

Laws are deterrent, not preventive.

You can make it illegal to think of the color pink, but if you can't enforce it is it really Law?

The Cabal police themselves, and they do so by assassinations, threats and blackmail.

It's not a good system by any means, but it does guarantee everyone is stuck following orders lest their dirty laundry lead to them being tarred and feathered.

Their oaths mean nothing unless the person administering the oath is dedicated to make sure the punishment is swiftly carried out.

Since, they are the ones in our current Government who punish themselves, and not We The People, they get slaps on the wrist and a lollipop when they do wrong.

That's why the alphabet agencies are completely unconstitutional. If not for them, they will have to face the ballot box every time they do wrong.

We need to take back the ability to hold them accountable without mob rule and violence. Easier said than done, I know, but we can't just copy their cronyism system otherwise we just become them and continue the cycle.

The Founding Fathers had this figured out, and since then the Cabal has been working one string at a time to pick apart the tapestry.

2
Fjolsvith 2 points ago +2 / -0

Since people started living together.

3
bobbyjoelinneman2 3 points ago +3 / -0

no i mean, since when did the elites, or their subfactions, follow or respect laws? laws are for the plebs. why would they bother to follow any "law of war" narratives?

2
Fjolsvith 2 points ago +2 / -0

They don't. But we do. We use the Law to take pieces off the board, like in a chess game.

The Law of War was written SPECIFICALLY for this time. It is what we will be able to use to claim victory fair and square.

Why is that important? Karma. We don't want bad things to flip back at us because we were not justified in our actions.

4
magachudd 4 points ago +4 / -0

Not sure why this wasn't stickied. Good shit.

4
031174 4 points ago +4 / -0

So whose troops (legally)where the national guard and did their prolonged presence effect the GC?

6
sleepydude [S] 6 points ago +6 / -0

You see, that's up in the air isn't it?

Trump was Commander in Chief, but the Mayor of D.C. had priority over the National Guard.

But only a Governor has that authority. And the Mayor, Bowser, of D.C. isn't the Governor because D.C. isn't a State.

And Trump wasn't in charge of the National Guard...

So Bowser effectively gave orders to U.S. Military knowing full well she didn't have the authority to.

But check this out:

11.8.2 Continued Performance of Duties by Civil Servants and Other Officials of Local Governments. The Occupying Power may, while retaining its paramount authority, permit the government of the country to perform some or all of its normal functions.140 It may, for example, call upon the local authorities to administer designated rear areas, subject to the

Consider how the National Guard were given pretty much no orders to do anything for months even after Jan 20th.

If my theory holds, that's because the first one to issue orders would be the de-facto Occupying Power.

Since the Capitol Police / DeepState "Legitimate Government" couldn't because they were the native government but couldn't let the beans spill, that fell to either Patriots or the U.S. Military.

Since there were no Patriots left and the U.S. Military had no clue they were a potential Occupying Power and weren't on U.S. soil to begin with, no one issued any orders.

The ones who wanted to couldn't and the ones who could didn't know it.

So the NG just ended up putzing around in a garage for a couple months...

If it wasn't for the mistreatment of the NG, it would be kinda funny.

5
031174 5 points ago +5 / -0

The gaurd certainly seemed caught betweenThat clicks too.

4
VetforTrump 4 points ago +4 / -0

So the jailed are actually POWS. Who knows?

4
Mr_A 4 points ago +4 / -0

all he had to make sure of is that the chucklefucks in Congress declared it an insurrection

So if that was necessary, doesn't it mean Pelosi has to be in on it?

4
FuckNewsom 4 points ago +4 / -0

I have believed all year that Pelosi was forced to flip.

4
Mr_A 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes, that makes sense. Especially with her announcement that she wouldn't run again. To me this theory is still fuzzy, with some parts striking me as right while others feel off. I'm trying to sort them out and clarify the idea as a whole.

I think it's a great insight, but needs time for me to digest properly.

4
LongTimeListener 4 points ago +4 / -0

Remember at the Inauguration how Nancy was led around by the ear by two SS (federal marshals?) that looked more like jailers?

Also note that her laptop went missing on January 6th.

Was the bitch fully leashed by the White Hats who wished her to continue in her role under the supervision of WH handlers? And that role would on the surface seem to be unchanged to the People but she would be fully under the control of WHs.

We are watching a movie after all.

3
Mr_A 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah, I remember that. Even so, I am proceeding under the illusion that congress, or at least congressional acts, are illegitimate. Somebody said the NYT wrote that the Q movement has morphed into a "choose your own adventure" movement. I think were all like the Harry Potter fans after book 5, wildly speculating about how it's all going to wrap up. We're all going to be part right, with lots of details that we get wrong.

3
sleepydude [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Who do you think is authorized to order Capitol Police around?

2
Mr_A 2 points ago +2 / -0

What I mean is that, if Trump needs Pelosi to call it an insurrection, it means that Pelosi is in on it, i.e. Pelosi is working with Trump. Either that or he didn't require it.

4
MAGA_mandalorian 4 points ago +4 / -0

I hear rumors that Nancy pelosi is also an actor. Not the real pelosi. So if that would be the case, then "pelosi" would be in on it. Kek this movie makes my brain hurt

3
MarkusCincinnatus 3 points ago +4 / -1

What does LoW 11.4 say?

2
dty6 2 points ago +3 / -1

GTS, fren.

3
lsvogel 3 points ago +3 / -0

Moves and Countermoves...I like it!

Perhaps there needs to be a third occupying force like the military that keeps posting 'woke' reports and distancing themselves from their oath to defend the Constitution. Can these military members be considered yet another form and alternative 'occupying force?'

In other words, split the military forces into two groups; those for and those against the Constitution, which creates another occupying force and then another insurrection so we'd have to wait another year. This could go on for years, folks!

3
LouisBeach 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is beyond awesome sauce I just had a chance to look over your theories could be spot on with anons below sauce added ! beyond well done in my humble opinion !

1
antonlevay 1 point ago +2 / -1

lots of assumptions and just incorrecy stuff here. for example, the capitol police is NOT sworn to DC - they safeguard congress and are completely separate from the DC police.

and it doesnt matter about all this technical legalese. you think the UN would do anything to america and our politics? we ARE the UN for all intents and purposes.